Post by toronto July 27, 2008 (41 of 127)
|
|
I feel that SACDs are on the way out.
To me , having to buy a SACD player was a rip-off.
I am fine with my multi-channeled stereo. NOW , comes , SHM-CDs. The best sound that I have ever heard.
I have now listened to 3 SHM-CDs and compared them with their older re-mastered counterparts. NO , they are NOT any louder , but they are so clean and clear that it is unbelievable. No compression issues at all and they have more body than SACDs.
1. NO , it is not wishful thinking that have the best sound that I have ever heard. I do have ears and I a very good multi-channeled stereo.
2. YES , you do have to hear some thing to be able to judge and compare it's sound. Until you have actually heard some thing and compared yourself , you have no idea of what , SHM-CDs REALLY SOUND LIKE?
That is like saying a movie was terrible WITH OUT even seeing it.
Surly you had to hear SACD discs in order to judge their quality? TRUE???
3. I am not an idiot. I don't like wasting my money on the latest CD sound gimmick.
SHM-CDs , are leap years ahead of MOFI and SACDs. They are compatible with ALL CDs players and they do not need a SACD player to hear them or anything else , except a normal CD player.
4. Of course this site is biased. I wouldn't expect anything else from a site that is called , "SA-CD.net".
5. I would highly recommend that you buy and try at least 1 of these SHM-CDs.
They are much cheaper when bought from HMV JAPAN or CD JAPAN. They have an average price of $22.99 American.
OUT NOW or COMING SOON , are some of , THE WHO , RAINBOW , ELTON JOHN , all of LED ZEPPELIN , ERIC CLAPTON , CREAM , SUPERTRAMP , DIO , G N' R , JIMI HENDRIX , ect...
You will not be disappointed!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
toronto,
can you explain in more detail what SHM-CD is? is it another high resolution format like SACD or newly remastered red book CD using some breakthrough technology similar to XRCD? from what I've heard so far it's just some super duper high material gimmick:-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
audioholik said:
toronto,
can you explain in more detail what SHM-CD is? is it another high resolution format like SACD or newly remastered red book CD using some breakthrough technology similar to XRCD? from what I've heard so far it's just some super duper high material gimmick:-)
Agreed because, for all the jiggery-pokery that may be used, it can only be (at best) a well mastered RBCD and can never approach the dynamic range and resolution of a SACD.
I wish that all RBCD's were well mastered but I'd far rather that similar effort would be made in putting these classic recordings out on a genuine audiophile format than trying to squeeze a tiny, tiny bit more from an inherently lower quality format.
PN
|
|
|
Post by toronto July 27, 2008 (44 of 127)
|
|
audioholik said:
toronto,
can you explain in more detail what SHM-CD is? is it another high resolution format like SACD or newly remastered red book CD using some breakthrough technology similar to XRCD? from what I've heard so far it's just some super duper high material gimmick:-)
No problem. It is a little bit confusing and it sounds impossible.
But , new mastering technology is invented all of the time , mostly from JAPAN and HOLLAND , where the CD was first invented.
First a little bit of my back ground so you know where I am coming from.
I love finding the best sound for my CDs. I having been buying many CDs for many years , mining through the re-mastering label rip-offs and abuses. I have found that some record companies [and people] are more honest about their sound quality than some others have been.
THE DOORS , first CDs said right on their studio CD's label , " digitally re-mastered from the ordinal master tapes ". ALL that , " digital re-mastering " , means is transferring analog tapes to a CD disc. This fooled many people into believing that the sound quality would improve. How many DOORS re-issues have we seen in recent years.?
YES , mastering technology IMPROVES over time , but come on , this was a rip-off.
Of all of the record companies , I have found that , SONY [in most cases , not all ] , have been one of the worst at ripping people off. How many versions of BOSTON's : BOSTON , do we need before they get the sound right??? There was even a TOM S. , version after the SACD version of BOSTON , came out. TOM , complained at his own web site that SONY , didn't even use the first generation master tapes when making their BOSTON SACD , disc.
How many re-issues of , BRUCE SPRINGSTEEN's and PINK FLOYD's entire catalog do we need , with out any improvement in sound?
YES , SACD sounds great in most cases , but there was never any need to make you buy an extra piece of SONY equipment to hear that SACD sound. They already had the technology to have SACD sound WITH OUT a SACD player. Since a lot of people wouldn't buy an extra SACD player , they are now using the fully compatible DSD which comes from , SACD and you don't need a SACD player to hear it. Check out , THE STONES , HOT ROCKS , in , DSD , ect...
Does this mean the ALL re-masters are really just rip-offs. NO!!!
There are many very good ones out there , like , the 2007 / 2008 GENESIS SACD HYBRID BOX SETs. These are in GREAT sounding in SACD [hybrid] & multi-channel stereo.
NOW ON TO YOUR QUESTIONS...???
Of all the record companies , I have found that , UNIVERSAL , was the best at doing a better and more honest job , staring in about , 1991 / 1992. YES , [ATLANTIC / UNIVERSAL] , milked the , LED ZEPPELIN , studio catalog almost to death. However , from the 1995 / 1996 versions of THE WHO studio works to most of Universal's latter catalog , they have done the best job at re-mastering , finally.
There are many great re-masters out there and some rip-offs , still.
NOW WE COME TO SHM-CDs from , UNIVERSAL.
This , believe it or not , is a vastly new technology , developed by , SHARP / JVC during the invention of , LCD T.V. , screens. A sort of " happy accident / side effect " , if you will.
It is NOT a new re-mastering process at all. The base [sound] for these SHM-CDs is already taken from their latest and best , re-masters. So , they have already been re-mastered.
1. It is a new resin applied to the CD disc and a new kind of plastic that lets the lazer head read the disc with more clearly and with more transparency.
2. I know that this sounds like B.S. People have every right to not believe that these SHM-CDs sound better , " how is that possible " ???
The music industry has made us all so cynical and then they have the nerve to complain about illegal down loading.? HA!!!
WELL , people thought that 10 years ago that the LCD T.V.s were impossible?
3. It is just as simple as that.
You don't know me at all.
ALL that I can do is tell you that I have heard some SHM-CDs CDs and compared these CDs to both SACD and other re-masters and these sound just incredible.
THE RECORD INDUSTRY only has itself to blame , not the consumers.
ALL I CAN DO , IS TELL PEOPLE TO TRY 1 SHM-CD FOR THEMSELVES , because it is the only way to know how good they really sound.
For those who love SACD , that is no problem , but not all CDs are in SACD and we don't know how long they will be made??? SHM-CDs are an excellent next step and alternative to the SACD.
I have no stake in lying about this to people. I do not work for any record company. NO , I am not delusional or a troll.
FOR MORE and better INFO CHECK OUT THIS LINK , PLEASE.
http://www.cdjapan.co.jp/special/shm-cd/index.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
so, SHM-CDs are not new remasters - these are all already available mass market remasters. It's not a hi-res format - they are just very expensive 16bit/44,1kHz CDs. I wonder if SHM-CD can even touch Steve Hoffman's remasters(DCC 24 KT GOLD DISCS), MFSL, XRCD24, K2HD...
And even if SHM-CD offers some improvement over normal CD it clearly can not rival SACD.
just my thoughts though..
|
|
|
Post by toronto July 27, 2008 (46 of 127)
|
|
audioholik said:
so, SHM-CDs are not new remasters - these are all already available mass market remasters. It's not a hi-res format - they are just very expensive 16bit/44,1kHz CDs. I wonder if SHM-CD can even touch Steve Hoffman's remasters(DCC 24 KT GOLD DISCS), MFSL, XRCD24, K2HD...
And even if SHM-CD offers some improvement over normal CD it clearly can not rival SACD.
just my thoughts though..
You really have to have heard and compared these SHM-CDs to know what they sound like. I have heard them and I have compared them.
There just is NO other way!!!
I don't think that an average price of $22.99 American is to much compared to the cost of your average SACD.
As I wrote earlier , not all CDs are available in , SACD. If you can get albums in SHM-CD that are not available in , SACD , then why not?
SACDs , are going the way of the DO-DO Bird.
I am looking forward to the new SHM-CD , LED ZEP : BOX SET on , SEPT , 10th , 2008.
Again , the only why to know is by listening to one for your self.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post by toronto July 27, 2008 (48 of 127)
|
|
Polly Nomial said:
One might also want to check out http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/archive/index.php/t-127465.html and http://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/showthread.php?p=75977 - let's just say that most thinking people would agree with the general tenor of the comments made...
They could encase the CD in nothing but air (to prevent any distortion from other compounds) and it still wouldn't alter the fact that it is still a plain, limited (by comparison to DVD-A, SACD, Blu-Ray) RBCD - which apparently is a major selling point because they work in all RBCD players. How about some snake oil anyone?
HAVE YOU HEARD ANY SHM-CDs for yourself.??? Have the majority of your posters???
Again , explain to all of us why , the SACD , is slowly being phased out?
Some of the peoples comments here , have hardly been very objective.
For all I know , this whole site is sponsored by , Sony , [just joking].
YES , you do need to hear some thing to know what it really sounds like , just like you have to see a movie to know how good it really is.
Why would I lie about this???
NO , I AM NOT FOOLING MY SELF.
YES , I HAVE HEARD MANY , SACDs and most of them sound just excellent.
All that I am saying is that SHM-CDs are a great alternative for people who think that it is a RIP-OFF to have to buy a SACD PLAYER , which are no longer needed , now!!!
They also can get SHM-CDs to cover the albums that are not sold in , SACD.
What is wrong with that??? In my opinion SHM-CDs sound just as good as SACDs.
One of your posters wrote that his SHM-CD version of , STEELY DAN's ," AJA " , was the best version that he has ever heard. I would agree with him. He heard it and so did I!
A few other posters have had both good and bad things to write about , SHM-CDs. They heard them , as well!
NO , this isn't a gimmick , nor are these people fooling themselves.
They were open minded enough to take a chance with their money and find out for themselves.
I know that I am very happy with my SHM-CDs. GEEZZZ , what are some people so afraid of???
You would think that some people might even be grateful for the tip???
|
|
|
|
|
|
toronto said:
HAVE YOU HEARD ANY SHM-CDs for yourself.???
Some of the peoples comments here , have hardly been very objective.
For all I know this whole site is sponsored by , Sony , [just joking].
YES , and you do need to hear some thing to know what it sounds like , just like you have to see a movie to know how good it really is.
NO , I AM NOT FOOLING MYSELF.
All that I am saying is that SHM-CDs are a great alternative for people who think that it is a RIP-OFF to have to buy a SACD PLAYER , which are no longer needed!!!!
Have I heard any? No. Do I need to? No.
Why not? Because, as you yourself profess, the discs are compatible with all CD players - this means that they are normal CD's but with a different covering than others. Because they are normal CD's, they have to comply with the Red Book dictates just as any other CD and so (the masterings burnt onto the discs being the same) the discs will contain identical information. This means that the discs must sound the same (assuming that one's player has even the most basic forms of error correction). So, for each individuals system, identical information on disc (and no scratches etc. on each disc) = identical information read from disc by players = identical information passed to speakers = identical sound. You may well BELIEVE that they sound different but then there are also people who (still) believe that the earth is less than 20000 years old!
FYI, asserting that SACD players are a rip-off on this site would probably be construed by most people here as flame-bait and, as such, one should expect a certain amount of robust scepticism to views that are allied to these posts. Also the site is not [financially] sponsored by Sony but they have redirected their own sites to here as Zeus/Stephen has done a better job than themselves!
There is nothing wrong with buying RBCD's of music that isn't available on SACD (indeed if your favourite artist is not on SACD in music that is on SACD I would and do still purchase said RBCD's) but to pretend that a good mastering on RBCD compares favourably with a good mastering on SACD?!?
|
|
|
Post by amatala July 27, 2008 (50 of 127)
|
|
toronto said:
Does this mean the ALL re-masters are really just rip-offs. NO!!!
There are many very good ones out there , like , the 2007 / 2008 GENESIS SACD HYBRID BOX SETs. These are in GREAT sounding in SACD [hybrid] & multi-channel stereo.
Strange - you are one of the few people who consider that the Genesis SACDs sound good.
As far as I am concerned the first Genesis Box contains the worst sounding SACDs I've ever heard and by far the worst ones in my 300+ SACD collection. The second box is better, but still far from being a reference in good SACD sound.
These discs sound so bright and overcompressed that I even preferred using my old CD-R copies I made years ago when transferring the Genesis discography to my music server. Really sad for an old SACD supporter to prefer his old CD-R copies...
|
|
